Packers Cheerleader responds to cyber-bullying

To be fair, I doubt any of us really know what was said about her. I doubt very much that it ended with things like, she's ugly or she needs a bag over the head. I'm certain it was much worse then that.

Has she opened herself up to that by being a cheerleader? I suppose she has but that doesn't make it right and it certainly doesn't excuse public forums, such as team sites or Facebook from allowing it to happen. Even we, on this site, have rules against such things and we are much smaller then either of those. No excuse for allowing the content IMO.

I'm sorry if you are using Facebook's determination as your reasoning. The fact of the matter is that Facebook errs on the side of freedom of speech. Here's another example of Facebook not doing anything, and it is clearly cyberbullying:

To be fair, I doubt any of us really know what was said about her. I doubt very much that it ended with things like, she's ugly or she needs a bag over the head. I'm certain it was much worse then that.

Has she opened herself up to that by being a cheerleader? I suppose she has but that doesn't make it right and it certainly doesn't excuse public forums, such as team sites or Facebook from allowing it to happen. Even we, on this site, have rules against such things and we are much smaller then either of those. No excuse for allowing the content IMO.

Not to derail this discussion, but there are tons of threads on this forum that mock Jerry for many things. Garrett is also constantly mocked for being a ginger.

Don't even get me started on all the Romo hate.

These fans said non-PG stuff about the cheerleader, but as a public figure, she has the option to ignore it, just like Jerry Jones has the option of not registering for CZ and reading all the posts urging him to kick the bucket already.

Now, if Jerry goes out of his way to join this forum, and then gets sad because people on here hate him, should he just make a little video like this to get everyone here to stop doing it?

This girl has the option of ignoring that fan page. She's not even a Bears fan. It's not like she needs to read that page for any reason.

True victims of cyber bullying don't quite have it easy like that unfortunately. They're attacked personally and viciously. Amanda Todd was attacked for being Amanda Todd. Not for being a Packers cheerleader. BIG difference.

It's a bit more complicated than eagerly wanting to read about yourself and then getting all sadface when everyone doesn't like you (moreso bc of the organization that you associate with over who you are personally).

Not to derail this discussion, but there are tons of threads on this forum that mock Jerry for many things. Garrett is also constantly mocked for being a ginger.

Don't even get me started on all the Romo hate.

These fans said non-PG stuff about the cheerleader, but as a public figure, she has the option to ignore it, just like Jerry Jones has the option of not registering for CZ and reading all the posts urging him to kick the bucket already.

Now, if Jerry goes out of his way to join this forum, and then gets sad because people on here hate him, should he just make a little video like this to get everyone here to stop doing it?

This girl has the option of ignoring that fan page. She's not even a Bears fan. It's not like she needs to read that page for any reason.

True victims of cyber bullying don't quite have it easy like that unfortunately. They're attacked personally and viciously. Amanda Todd was attacked for being Amanda Todd. Not for being a Packers cheerleader. BIG difference.

It's a bit more complicated than eagerly wanting to read about yourself and then getting all sadface when everyone doesn't like you (moreso bc of the organization that you associate with over who you are personally).

No, it's not more complicated then that. FB and other sites have rules. Those rules clearly define what is allowed. If I understand the problem, those posts violated the rules of the sites. Therefore, the sites should have done something to correct the problem. Can you be everywhere all the time? No, but if you have a thread going viral on a board, you know what the content of the thread is and it should not be difficult to correct the situation.

Jerry Jones and opinions about how he runs the team are open for discussion. Talking about indecent behaviors with Jerry Jones is not. There is a big difference there.

This Cheerleader did what to provoke any of this? She cheered poorly? She wore the wrong uniform? She didn't show up to Cheer at all? Exactly what, other then looking like she does, did she do to deserve any of this?

Your argument falls short there IMO. The examples you use, with Jerry, are based upon actions he has done over the years. Those discussions are different.

Is it legal to give an opinion on this Cheerleader, no matter how negative or juvenile it might be? Yes, probably and I don't know that this is really the question or issue. The question is, is it morally OK? I suspect that you would agree it is not. I also suspect that you would agree that any other answer is indefensible.

When I was in school, I was bullied because I had a speech problem. And unless they got physical with me, it was usually perfectly legal -- just as it should've been.

However, the fact it was legal didn't make it right.

I actually wonder how this will eventually be interpreted in the future. I mean, I would guess that in cases such as the one with Todd, the bullying started in such a way as to be withing legal limits. Eventually, it escalated and probably crossed that legal line at some point but the issue, it would seem to me, is that it's a progressive behavioral pattern that increasingly gets worse. The more you are allowed to do, the further people take it. If that's true, then at some point, you have to consider the possibility that cutting the behavior short as early as possible would be considered legally.

It's going to be interesting how this is considered going forward.

Your statement about legal and right is dead on Scip. I would guess that what you are talking about there is even more relevant now because it is worse now. You can post anything or text anything and who's going to catch you? The problem is too wide spread and there is not enough control over the situation so people will take it too far, particularly young people but this is certainly not a situation that is exclusive to children. Adults are just as guilty of the behavior, thou perhaps not as often. At least I hope they are not.

After doing a little research on cyber bullying; I do not believe it should be a crime. Seems to me to infringe upon free speech; however, private websites can regulate content as they see fit.

I believe cyber bullying should be a crime.

This just isn't cyber bullying. We have plenty of times where others call somebody 'stupid' or the like on this forum (along with countless other places on the internet). There are no cries to stop those people from cyber bullying. Nor should there be.

The real problem I see here is that in life it's a good thing to be able to ignore people's insults, negativity, bad behavior, etc. It's the old 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me' mantra.

If we start crying foul for every put down, then cases like Amanda Todd which are real serious cases of cyber bullying, get lost in this nonsense.

Did you see the pic that was being used on the Bears fan site? Not a flattering pic.(posted below) Also from what I've read the Packers don't have (professional) cheerleaders like the Cowboys. They simply allow local college cheerleaders (male and female) form a cheer squad.

What about it? She's cheerleading. It's not like she's picking her nose.

I'd rather take the risk of some people having their feelings hurt than the risk of giving govt more reasons to restrict free speech

I don't necessarily disagree with this position but the question is really one of legal precedents.

If it is determined that allowing such behavior only results in continued bullying, ever escalating, it can be argued that the best solution for prevention is to stop it before it has a chance to escalate further. Now, I'm not a lawyer and I don't really know all the ins and outs of something like that but that would be how I could see this being implemented.

Would it be right? No, it would probably be a bad thing but unfortunately, like many things in life, decisions are made for us based on the worst possible scenario and not necessarily on the majority of society and how reasonable said society might be.

Dude, I know about those girls, and that's why I'm trying to explain that this is VERY different.

Those girls don't stick their heads out SEEKING attention, and go out of the way to be in the spotlight (like a cheerleader for a freakin NFL team).

The best part of this little video is how she was praising all the people who called her cute. She's got no problem with the celebrity status of being a cheerleader, and definitely no problem reading through anything positive about her picture. It just hurt her feelings when everyone didn't have that opinion.

HUGE difference between this and cyber bullying.

...coveniently forgotten the comment one poster wanted to do with her and a paper bag.

If that isn't a personal attack on the girl I don't know what is???

I don't understand you. Whether this is some formal or criminal term you can't sit there on your keyboard/electronic device and publicly say you condone this.

Is this how you interact with society or want it to interact with you and your loved ones. Whether you are famous or not? Rich or not?

What does this kind of action say about the culture of sports fandom that the cheerleaders have anything bearing on the value of a sports franchise?

Especially with a metric, such as beauty, where the old adage is its truly in the eye of the beholder.